aerrmann

Argument topic: In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river's water and the river's smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is therefore sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities. Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted. My Essay: As indicated by the city survey, water sports are a favourite for some of the residents in Mason City. The argument made by the writer is that Summary that the use of water sports on the Mason River will increase if the Mason River is cleaned up, which will require budget spend from the city. The increase in budget to clean up the Mason river comes from the assumption that people will use it if cleaned up. However, there are many fallacies in this assumption that I will explore. The survey indicates that water sports are a favourite ranked activity by Mason City residents. However, the location of where the city residents prefer to do water sports is not indicated. The city residents may perform water sports on vacation out of own, or at another river in the city. They do not necessarily do the water sports in Mason River. This opens holes in the argument that recreational activities at Mason River will increase if cleaned up. The second assumption is that recreational use will increase with if the quality of the river water and smell of the river improve. In contrast to this point, the smell and water quality may not be linked specifically to recreation use. Perhaps the river has a strong water flow and is not friendly towards the use of recreation. There could be a number of reasons, including accessibility, location, or temperature of the river that could affect the usage numbers. Shifting from a census lens more political lens outlook, a sensitive issue in most city debates is budget. If the budget this year is devoted to riverside recreational facilities, the question is will it go to the Mason River? The specific allocation of resources is not indicated, and therefore the assumption is made that the funding will go to Mason River when there may be more geographic areas with higher recreation use that would benefit from the funding. The last point to address is the stated complaints from citizens regarding the smell and quality of the water may warrant a call to action, however the spending of the budget to clean up the river does not indicate how or why - other than recreational purposes. Perhaps the river needs to be eradicated of some pollution for environmental purposes or ecological purposes. This would drastically change how the city would clean up the river and whether the river would be used for recreational purposes after. In assessing the argument, the assumption that the increase in budget to clean up the Mason River will increase recreational use needs to be more clearly articulated to make a case, as many assumptions are used. There is no direct correlation comes from the assumption that people will use it if cleaned up. If the assumptions are unwarranted, the city could spend a lot of money towards a recreational site that may not get used or may not be cleaned out for the right rationale.

Topic: As people rely more on technology, the ability to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. Discuss the extent to which you agree with the statement and explain your reasoning. Consider how the statement may or may not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your idea. My Essay: It has been stated by technological determinists that technology impacts the ability for society to think for themselves. This essay will argue that the ability to think for oneself deteriorates as people rely more on technology. There are four main points that I will bring into the discussion that outline the effects technology has on people’s ability to think for themselves. These four deal with critical thinking, psychological effects, cognitive behaviour, and the time factor. All of these elements have been affected by the reliance on technology. Before the majority of the population had access to the Internet, people spent time researching topics through encyclopedias, printed articles, face to face, and print. One had to spend time going into great depths on these topics. Because of the time spent, one could ground themselves and take the time to understand and process the information. Understanding the information is what provides people with the ability to think for themselves on a topic. The issue with reliance on technology is that people do not need to spend the time researching topics in depth anymore, as the speed of how we process mass amounts of information has increased. One could argue that people do not need the time to process the information. However, I will state that if a person does not spend adequate time processing a topic themselves, it can become a slippery slope and undermine their critical thinking ability. Unable to digest the sheer material at hand, people lose the ability to think for themselves on a topic they are trying to understand. The second point also requires critical thinking, however takes a more psychological approach. As people are subject to hyper realities with the increase of technology, their ability to judge physical reality deteriorates, which affects their ability to think for themselves. One timely example of this is military training using simulated realities and augmented reality technology. Future soldiers are trained through simulated video games on target shooting. What is often forgotten is that there will be a time when they are shooting at real people, not a target on a screen. The dangerous potential is that these soldiers are relying on technology as a form of ‘reality’, but the stimulation makes things less ‘real’. Psychologically, it takes away from decision making abilities of empathy through veiling a very serious situation in the form of an augmented reality, taking away the ability to think for oneself. The third point is around cognitive behaviour. As we begin to constantly use technologies that perform our own day to day tasks, we may lose the ability to make cognitive decisions for ourselves quickly. For example, if I am in a car that is driving itself every day, I may not be able to make a quick reflexive decision if the time of an accident is near. The last point I would like to address is the time factor. Advocates for the reliance of technology will argue that people have more time to think for themselves since technology has made things more efficient. However, I would refute this due to the point that that they may have more time to spend on other things, but it could be a fallacy that this time is spent on critical thinking. This time saved due to efficiencies may also be spent coming up with means to create more technology, not necessarily for oneself to make their own decisions. In summary, people that rely on technologies lose the ability to think for themselves. The factors that enhance this are critical thinking, psychological, cognitive, as well as time induced.